Results 1,381 to 1,410 of 1483
-
2012-06-04, 04:04 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.
I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that. -- ChubbyRain
Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.
-
2012-06-04, 04:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
I agree; I think actually everyone will - wizards and clerics will need it for their magic attacks, and you can't hose rogues that badly on attack rolls. But near as I can tell, it's not happening in the first 3 levels, unless they left that part out of the playtest advancement. Even a +1 every 4 levels is really slow.
-O
Obviously based on 4e, the knee-jerk reaction to that news might be "but if my accuracy doesn't increase then I'll never hit monsters!" and, as a result, "Accuracy-increasing feats will be mandatory again just like 4e!"
If they get the bounded-accuracy thing right, though, that shouldn't be true. It will still be BENEFICIAL to be more accurate, because then you can hit those big plate-wearing guys more often. But in order to be more accurate you'll be giving up the choice to increase your damage or utility or something else instead. Once you crunch the math, hopefully there's a meaningful decision there instead of everything coming down to "I just want to hit more." Damage should be just as important, because there's no point hitting every round if you're only dealing 5 damage out of 500 hp on the higher-level enemies.
Basically (and I know I'm rambling a bit here but I'm tired and it's getting hard to be coherent), increasing accuracy beyond a certain point in this system will have diminishing returns as you start to have hit rates approaching 100% against more and more monsters.
-
2012-06-04, 05:40 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
It doesn't say that characters won't be getting bonuses. It says that, effectively, monster defenses won't be scaling with them. So a tough plate warrior enemy at 1st level might have 18 AC (insert random number here). A tough plate warrior at level 20 will also have around 18 AC, rather than having 30 AC.
I see this as generally a positive thing, as it means that there's effectively one thing that represents "harder to kill" instead of two separate things, and the quadratic effect that they have. It seems like this should also make it more feasible to have a wider spread of level ranges play together, which I think is *awesome*.
-
2012-06-04, 05:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
- Gender
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
I am kind of liking the fact that certain things won't scale by level. In 3rd edition if you wanted to play a fighter type, you might as well take your first 3 levels in fighter, ranger and paladin for +6 to fort and +2 to reflex. Grab a second level of paladin and you add your charisma bonus to all saves. Crazy multiclassing = great bonuses was a significant balance issue.
Honestly, the game has always kind of been set up (or was supposed to be set up) to scale with numbers. Your BAB increases, but so does your opponents AC. It's just up to the DM to balance out the correct level of opposition.
-
2012-06-04, 05:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Gender
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
I'd like to point out this is how 3e worked. Fighters then had to spend a lot of resources on expensive magic items to bring his AC up to match high level monster offenses.
If it comes down to having to spend resources used to maintain damage or utility on things like skill bonuses, attack bonuses, and defenses, then what's going to happen is skills and defense will inevitable suffer. The choice will be between offenses (damage or to-hit, it's easy to math out what's going to be better of the two), and utility (unless the utility offered sucks, in which case it gets chucked out with Defense and Skills).If my text is blue, I'm being sarcastic.But you already knew that, right?
-
2012-06-04, 05:58 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
Er, I meant the example to be enemy defenses, not your defenses. Sorry if that was insufficiently clear.
Presumably, monster attacks would also not scale as much, either.
The ability to crunch and mathematically determine which is superior will still be there, and I think it's pretty inherent to the combat model used in D&D and most RPGs.
-
2012-06-04, 06:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Gender
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
If my text is blue, I'm being sarcastic.But you already knew that, right?
-
2012-06-04, 06:31 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
No, because the added difficulty comes from higher damage output and higher hp, rather than higher defences and higher accuracy.
Instead of being harder to hit, they'll take more hits to take down. Instead of hitting you more often, they'll deal a more significant portion of your HP with each successful attack.
-
2012-06-04, 06:33 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Gender
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
No what he's saying is players accuracy will scale, but monster defenses won't. Which means at low levels you hit on a 10, at high levels you hit on a 5. When it's accuracy improving relative to lower level enemies, it's fine. Accuracy improving relative to all enemies, including higher level ones, doesn't seem right.
If my text is blue, I'm being sarcastic.But you already knew that, right?
-
2012-06-04, 06:38 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
Not really. That would be true if accuracy improved as it does in the current game, but my understanding is that it doesn't.
IOW, in most editions, accuracy and defenses scale in tandem. A "tough to hit" opponent might need a 15 to hit at first level, as you have +5 to hit, and they have a 20AC. At tenth level, that's achieved by the players having +15 to hit, and the enemy having a 30AC.
On top of this "baseline increase", there's things that can give you bonuses above the baseline.
So what they're talking about is getting rid of the baseline increases completely. You might still get bonuses, but they'll be smaller, and will represent exceptional accuracy above "baseline". Level improvement happens through additional HP and damage, not through accuracy increases. So at level 10 you're only marginally more likely to hit that kobold than you were at level 1 - but if you do, you'll obliterate him. Similarly, that kobold will only be marginally less likely to hit you - but if he does, the damage that he does to you will be nothing but a scratch compared to your hit points.
-
2012-06-04, 06:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Gender
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
So what they're talking about is getting rid of the baseline increases completely. You might still get bonuses, but they'll be smaller, and will represent exceptional accuracy above "baseline".
What I'm trying to say is that the two synergize, so any bonuses to one makes the other worth more. But this likely won't be taken into account. We'll get lame **** like Weapon Focus +2 to damage, and the occasional feat or item that gives +1-2 to hit. Given the +hit is that much more efficient than the +damage, the +hit is the obvious option to take. Thus we end up with all PCs having hit scaling anyway, just having to waste resources on it.
Or if they don't include +hit at all, then there goes the scaling mentioned, and a level 20 Fighter will still miss a guy in full plate 50% of the time.
Even ignoring all of that, and assuming the HP/Damage scaling sorts everything out for combat, Skills are even more limited by this system. Skill Points aren't a part of the core game, you get +3 to a couple of skills from backgrounds, and one of the early blogs indicates that might scale up a bit at higher levels. But anything outside of those 2-4 skills a character is going to be no better at by level 20 than they are at level 1. The example used in the article was how a wooden door is still going to be a valid obstacle at level 20. I mean really, how is this seen as a good thing? Why should a 20th level Fighter who can stand face to face with a tarrasque and a balor not be able to effortlessly kick down a door that people can deal with in real life? Why should a 20th level rogue still fail any percentage of the time against a lock he was picking at level 1?
The lack of progression in non-combat areas for mundanes bothers me far more than the combat stuff. It only gets worse if casters start getting spells that let them ignore the skill system, and we all know they will.If my text is blue, I'm being sarcastic.But you already knew that, right?
-
2012-06-04, 07:02 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
I don't think they're likely to do a good job, but there are obvious balancing mechanisms*. Moreover, them just trying it effectively insures that somebody will make home brew for 5e that actually does it well. However, this should insure that groups are more viable, provided they don't screw it up with spells.
*Pools of defense points that can be spent to raise AC against specific incoming attacks, favored enemy type bonuses, pools of attack points created through specific actions, so on and so forth.I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.
I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that. -- ChubbyRain
Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.
-
2012-06-04, 07:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
-
2012-06-04, 07:16 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Gender
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
It's both. I don't like the base idea. However, despite not liking the base idea, I can see how it could possibly work in some game (in fact, a lot of video games work off the same principle. Increasing HP and damage, with miss chances that remain low and static throughout the game), but don't believe WotC will handle it well enough to work appropriately.
If my text is blue, I'm being sarcastic.But you already knew that, right?
-
2012-06-04, 07:27 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
-
2012-06-04, 07:32 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Gender
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
If my text is blue, I'm being sarcastic.But you already knew that, right?
-
2012-06-04, 07:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
-
2012-06-04, 07:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
Partially - though lower (but not extremely lower) enemies could still be a challenge in moderate groups, where minions usually needed to swarm.
I am sad about the loss of minions - I thought they were one of the better 4e ideas.
I'm not sure this would apply to skills - did the article mention that?
And general distrust of WotC's ability to design games isn't really a topic we can have any kind of interesting discussion about, as it can only degenerate to "yes they can" and "no they can't". If we don't believe they can design a workable game at all, then what type of bad game they write is pretty much irrelevant.Last edited by kyoryu; 2012-06-04 at 08:01 PM.
-
2012-06-04, 09:04 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Gender
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
I just thought of this: Another way to think of this high-level=high-damage change is that full Power Attack is now the assumed default. Damage is what goes up with level, not accuracy, and you now have the build-choice to increase your accuracy at the cost of extra damage (or action-economy, or whatever else) normally gained through levels.
-
2012-06-05, 01:22 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2006
- Location
- Utah
- Gender
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
You can call me Draz.
Trophies:
Spoiler
Also of note:
- Winning Entry of Gestalt Build Challenge IV
- 3rd Place in Iron Chef XI (Blade Bravo)
- Judge of Iron Chef XXIII (Divine Champion)
I have a number of ongoing projects that I manically jump between to spend my free time ... so don't be surprised when I post a lot about something for a few days, then burn out and abandon it.
... yes, I need to be tested for ADHD.
-
2012-06-05, 01:46 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
-
2012-06-05, 04:00 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
-
2012-06-05, 04:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
This has been addressed by others, but again, it IS balance-able and we'll just have to see whether they can pull it off.
The thing is, it's essentially the same in 4e. If you take every monster in the game of 10th level, and take 5 away from its defences and its attack bonuses. Then you remove the 1/2-level scaling on defences and attack bonuses from PCs. There - you've now got the 5e system. Then the only thing left is to re-work feats so that they don't destroy the intent of the system (many of which were only added in the first place to "fix" the math broken by the constant scaling).
I don't think that's such an awful thing, necessarily, as long as when he does hit he does lots more damage.
That's not quite what they've said. You get a static bonus to 2-4 skills from themes, yes, but the core of the system is ability checks. These still scale with level through attribute increases, which makes sense - a character that gets stronger but no more dexterous will be able to knock down bigger doors but not pick more difficult locks.
I also would be very surprised if there weren't skill-related feats, but whether they're a viable choice remains to be seen. There could also be a skill module, if this whole modular thing gets off the ground. But the core system should work fine by itself.
An iron-bound wooden door, the example in the article, will still be a valid obstacle against a *wizard* or similarly not strong class at level 20. Why would a wizard who has spent no time at all strengthening his muscles be able to knock down a door with his bare hands just because his magical ability got stronger? A 20th level Fighter WILL find that door easier to knock down, and he WILL be able to knock down the adamantium door that the Wizard never has a chance of even touching. Same with the rogue.
It's all about being better at what you're good at, while not completely invalidating everyone else - which I believe has been a common complaint of the skill system since 3e? If you're not trained in a skill, then at level 20 you might as well not even be able to roll it. This is meant to address that, I guess.
-
2012-06-05, 04:13 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
-
2012-06-05, 04:14 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.
"I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!
-
2012-06-05, 05:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Location
- Zagreb
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
And that is the core reason why I think 4E is a badly designed system. It is at its base a ability check system. Its the reason you get the padded sumo effect, monster hp just goes up much faster then player damage does, while your chances to hit remain the same.
It is also hellishly boring; needing a 10+ to hit every monster you come across is so dull. You don't even need dice anymore, a coin will do. At least in 4E you had the tactical minigame, where positioning and buffs from allies had some meaning on the outcome of combat. So far as we can see, the tactical minigame has been greatly diminished in 5E.
That does fix the automatic scaling problem, but it still does nothing about the single roll ability check system. It is a bad resolution mechanic, and now they are basing their whole system on it.
The simple fact is that bonuses on ability checks are small compared to the values the d20 can take, and thus are almost meaningless. If your bonus caps out at +5, then in reality breaking down a door is just as hard at level 20 as it is at level 1 when you had a +3 bonus. It has nothing to do with your character and all to do with how you roll. If you add something like a extended series of rolls type of test, then these small bonuses become more meaningful again, but it does not seem they are going in that direction.
I see no problem in a system designed in such a way that if a character did not allocate any (or a small amount) of resources to a ability that he shouldn't even roll at level 20. Its logical, in the same way I don't have to bother to show up to a tennis match against Roger Federer to know that he will win 100% of the time.Last edited by Tehnar; 2012-06-05 at 06:07 AM.
-
2012-06-05, 06:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
I think you're understating the bonuses you would be able to earn. You can get +4 or +5 simply from ability scores, another +3 from a theme. That's +8 already. Versus, say, someone with -1 in the ability score and none from the theme. A difference of 9 between "pretty good" and "bad" is nothing to sneeze at, and I'm sure you'll be able to increase the +8 with other options.
That's not quite what it's about. The problem with scenarios where people are adding 20 to their rolls is that the DM keeps having to come up with increasingly ridiculous scenarios to keep the trained PC challenged, which at the same time completely invalidates the untrained PCs.
To use your tennis example, this would be like having a ball machine that was set up to be pretty easy for Roger Federer, but would be quite challenging for anyone else. Anyone else could still give it a go and have a chance of success, whereas Federer would be almost guaranteed to succeed.
If you were playing AGAINST Federer, of course you'd have an incredibly hard time beating him - but that's not a skill check anymore, that's a contest. And of course in a contest the person with the much higher modifier should have every chance of winning.
-
2012-06-05, 07:20 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.
"I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!
-
2012-06-05, 07:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
-
2012-06-05, 08:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Now your playing with Playtests!
Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.
"I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!